Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Zhongjun Cao

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Merge. The target of the merge needs to discussed, either an article about the incident or about racial violence in Australia. Consensus is clear that the person's death is notable for inclusion but not the person itself (per WP:BIO1E), so a deletion of the information in this article is not favored by consensus but neither is leaving it at its current place. Regards So Why 14:51, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Zhongjun Cao[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability hinges on a single event, which is not usually considered sufficient. Favonian (talk) 11:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP , notable article has attracted worldwide attention in media. THere are many murder victims or victims of serious and violent crime that are in the scope of wikiepdia notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmy Heat (talk • contribs) 12:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The crime appears to be notable, but the victim is, tragically, known only for being killed. A solution would be to rename the article to something appropriate (Curry bashing murder may be a bit too lurid) to make it clear, that it's about the murder. Favonian (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Murder of Dr Zhongjun Cao per above comment --Pontificalibus (talk) 13:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes this is what I think too. Move or rename article to Murder of Dr Zhongjun Cao or The Tragic Death of Zhong Jun Cao or which ever would be the appropriate title for the incident. (Marinesuper (talk) 09:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Delete He is clearly not notable. It is not even clear to me that the murder is notable; there are thousands of murders, and every incident which has been in the news for a while is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Notable as the first possible non Indian victim of this new trend in Curry bashing and the first to die as a result. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Racism Watch Australia (talk • contribs) 09:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move - Per Pontificalibus. There's a good amount of coverage in major Australian newspapers about the incident, and some "buzz" in papers outside of Australia. There was more than just a murder here, this was a Chinese academic murdered because he was mistaken for being Indian. That brought the interest of media in both China and India, which explains why this murder is more notable than others. There were also protests in Chinese communities in Australia about the lenient sentence the murderer received. But per WP:BLP1E it's best to have an article about the murder and its effects, not the person, since he is only notable for the murder. -- Atama頭 16:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Clearly non notableother then being murdered. While sad it opens the doors for everyone else ever shot that ended up in a paper. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to the above', Hell In A Bucket, the circumstances of this are unique and I totally disagree with your remark that "it opens the doors for everyone else ever shot that ended up in a paper.". This one is much different given the facts that it was a racially motivated attack that ended in a man's death and the fact that he is most likely the first non Indian victim of "Curry Bashing". (Racism Watch Australia (talk) 10:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Weak keep and Move to Murder of Dr Zhongjun Cao. Yeah, with the current article name this is a BLP1E case, but that problem would be easily cured by a move to a different title. The real question is if the underlying event (the murder, the trials and subsequent political fallout) is sufficiently notable and whether it gets over the WP:NOT#NEWS bar. It seems to me that in this case the answer to the last question is "yes", even if not overwhelmingly so. There has been a fair amount of newscoverage of the case in the Australian national (and not just local) media, as a googlenews search shows. Moreover, crucially, this coverage was not limited to the time of the murder but extended over a significant period of time afterwards: from some articles in January 2008 (e.g. [1][2][3]) and through 2009 (e.g. [4][5][6][7]). There has also been some international coverage, in India (e.g.[8]) and, apparently, in China. Overall seems enough to me to overcome the WP:NOT#NEWS bar. The article needs some clean-up though. Kinoq (talk) 18:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Racial violence in Australia. The idea behind WP:BIO1E~~BLP1E~~ is to cover the incident in a broader context rather than in the isolation of the non-notable individual. I think that this could be added as a paragraph in Racial violence in Australia with a benefit to that article without the current over emphasis on the particular victim. (Because the incident was in 2008, I could not merge it with 2009 attacks on Indian students in Australia.) Racepacket (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm somewhat bemused as to how an article on a murder victim could be a BLP1E case - or indeed a BLP anything else case. --Paularblaster (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, it is WP:BIO1E (which applies to all biographies, including for deceased individuals), rather than WP:BLP1E, but the main principle is the same. Kinoq (talk) 01:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Racial violence in Australia. This subject does seem to be sufficiently notable to be worth covering, but at the moment there isn't much to say about it, and it may be better covered as a subsection of a longer, more general article. WP:BIO1E possibly also comes into play here. Robofish (talk) 23:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.
Keep I'm in agreement with article originator that the murder of Dr Cao seems to have attracted significant media attention as well as continuing debate in both media and written articles on violent behaviour. Somne research as also turned up the possible formation of the Dr Zhongjun Cao foundation or trust. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Real Natural (talk • contribs) 05:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep Notable as the first possible non Indian victim of this new trend in Curry bashing and the first to die as a result. Media coverage is vast also. (Racism Watch Australia (talk) 10:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)) Re-edit (Racism Watch Australia (talk) 12:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Merge to Racial violence in Australia. Tragic case but BIO1E. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
~~Merge per above~~ Delete. Dr Cao was non-notable by WP guidelines. His death is tragic but we don't keep articles on every murder victim for obvious reasons. –Moondyne 11:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there is enough prominence with this person who the article is about and the circumstances are or were unique. (Starman005 (talk) 12:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Every murder is unique; I fail to see how this one is moreso. The murder seems to have been a case of mistaken ethnicity which is unusual but not earthshattering. –Moondyne 12:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm also happy with merge, given that a number of people believe that it can be worked into Racial violence in Australia, but to be honest I feel that this may be tricky as the Racial Violence article is focused on riots and series of attacks rather than individual one-off murders. While it is clear that the article describes a horrible event, we don't - and shouldn't - have articles about every murder, and the only apparent connection between this and the more notable 2009 attacks was that in this case the victim was mistakenly believed to be Indian, while the later attacks were directed at Indian students. If it can be shown that it had a wider impact I'd feel differently, though. - Bilby (talk) 13:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename I don't know if "The Murder of Zhong Jun Cao" is the best title though. Possibly "The Zhong Jun Cao" death or tragedy. Having come on board here after doing some thikning about it and if it is notable, I think the incident itself is notable but not the person himself. I suggest here that the tragic event rather than the person himself is the notable aspect and should be covered. To suggest that this should be merged with another article such as Racial violence in Australia serves no point as this event tragic as it is was an actual indication of what is wrong in our society. Jun Cao's death is the result of what is taking place and whether we like it or not this is something that should be taken note of. In regard to Racism Watch Australia's theory about him being the first non Indian victim, I would like to suggest that we do some research on that first. He may be right or he may not. Still at the end of the day, a man died a horrific death as a result of a trend in Indian Bashing aka Curry Bashing. Therefore I believe that the event of his bashing and the outcome should be covered in an article that carries the title.... "The Death of Zhong Jun Cao" or "The Murder of Zhong Jun Cao" (Marinesuper (talk) 09:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC))— Marinesuper (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.